Transcript Social Well-Being, Cohesion and Human Health Ron McQuaid & Ariel Bergmann Employment Research Institute Napier University Edinburgh Presented Bordeaux, 2008

Social Well-Being, Cohesion
and Human Health
Ron McQuaid & Ariel Bergmann
Employment Research Institute
Napier University
Edinburgh
Presented Bordeaux, 2008
Sustainable Development
• Three Pillars of Sustainability
– Environmental
– Economic
– Social
Economic Sustainability
– Reasonably well developed, but still very
general and not exact:
e.g.
Cost Benefit Analysis
Project Appraisal
Private v Social costs, discount rates, etc.
Concerned partly with economic growth
Social Sustainability
• No agreed definition: a society that has social
justice, is persistent and thrives …..
• “Development (and/or growth) that is compatible
with harmonious evolution of civil society,
fostering an environment conductive to the
compatible cohabitation of culturally and socially
diverse groups while at the same time
encouraging social integration, with
improvements in the quality of life for all
segments of the population.”
Polese and Stren (2000, 15-16)
Social Sustainability
• It includes (economic, social and
environment dimensions):
– Quality of life issues
– Equality and social justice
– Fair distribution of benefits and costs
– Access to social resources to allow them to
participate fully in society
– Individuals have opportunity to reach full
potential and overcome disadvantage
– Promotes diversity while being inclusive
Social Sustainability (cont.)
– Multi-generational timescale
– Primarily implemented and measured at the
local community level
– Importantly it is multi-dimensional (difficult/
impossible to get a single measure such as
monetarisation measure)
– SIA is not just the inclusion of the social
impacts of environmental policies
The sources of unsustainable development
are not always the result of greed, ignorance
or irrational choices.
Rather, they may be the result of
unintentional accumulation of rational, wellintended decisions made by people who are
operating within societies whose political and
economic systems make it difficult to act in
ways that are responsible to all those
affected in the present and in the future.
European Union Policy
Background
• The Lisbon Strategy (introduces social
dimension, especially as related to work)
• Gothenburg Strategy
• European Union Sustainable Development
Strategy 2006
• Social Agenda 2005-2010
• European Employment Strategy and the
Luxembourg Process
Council of the EU
• Employment, Social Policy, Health and
Consumer Affairs (EPSCO)
• The Environment Council
Impact Categories/Issues
•
•
•
•
•
Governance
Employment
Community Development
Health and Well-being
Culture and heritage
Impact Categories/Issues (cont.)
Cross-cutting all issues are concerns
for:
 participation of affected people in
decisions
 distribution of social benefits
and costs
 equality
 social justice
Governance
(public participation, social inclusion, and public attitudes)
Does the policy:
• impact on the involvement of groups and
stakeholders to participate in governance?
• impact on social institutions or public institutions
and administrations in their ability and
responsibilities to governance?
• impact on a group or the individual’s access to
the legal justice system?
• impact on the public being informed about
issues within their community?
• impact on the privacy of individuals and
households?
Employment
(employment at the local community level)
Does the policy:
• facilitate creation of jobs or the loss of jobs?
• impact a specific class of workers or
households?
• affect the demand for labour?
• impact on the functioning of the labour market?
• impact on the type and quality of jobs?
• impact on the health, safety and dignity of
workers?
Community Development
(local social benefits derived from community
participation in commercial activities and policy)
Does the policy:
• impact on the level of social capital and
activism by non-governmental groups or
individuals?
• impact on social inclusion, social
cohesion, and distribution of equity and
benefits within society?
• impact on the liveability and sense of
community wellbeing?
Health and Well-being(1)
(physical health and emotional sense of
enjoying and achieving in life)
Does the policy:
• impact on the quality of soil, surface water, and
ground water? The quality and sufficiency of
drinking water is of special importance. What are
the health gains or risks that may occur?
• impact on the occupational health risks that may
occur with the development?
Health and Well-being(2)
• impact development or change of land use on
recreational uses in the area and the effects on
the local community as well as non-local
visitation to the area?
• impact development on local infrastructure such
as hospitals, schools, waste disposal, sanitation,
and emergency response capability? Will there
be sufficient capacity?
• impact equitable distribution of the health risks,
disadvantages and benefits from development?
What is the desirable distribution of the gains and
losses among social groups?
Culture and heritage (1)
(culture is the total range of activities and ideas of a group
of people with shared traditions which are transmitted and
reinforced by members of a group)
(heritage can be explained as all the things, places and
ideas passed on from the past which are of special cultural
significance to the life of a community, including both
cultural and human-built elements)
Culture and heritage (2)
Does the policy:
• impact on cultural or heritage issues in a
community
• impact on sites and features
• impact on activities, practices, skills and events
• impact on meanings, identities, and
representations of importance to the community
• Impacts on indigenous peoples
Sustainability Impact
Assessment Tools (SAIT)
• Currently in development
– SENSOR
– EFORWOOD
– PLUREL
– SEAMLESS
Modelling Social Impacts
• Identify the social impacts of a policy, who
is affected and the timescale
– Causal Model
– Qualitative Assessment
– Impact Matrix
– Measuring factors such as wellbeing?
Example of 1 issue:- Demography
A typology of urban and rural regions with regard to sustainable demographic development
1995-2000 (% of population)
Tot
PU
SR
PR
Per Cent of Population
1 Double positive regions
2 Growth regions with out-migration
3 Growth regions with natural decrease
4 Declining regions with in-migration
5 Declining regions with natural increase
6 Double negative regions
Source. Estimations based on Eurostat data
31,9
35.4
34.3
20.6
13,6
18,0
9,2
12,3
15,0
12.2
13.4
6.9
14.1
17.8
15.7
19.9
10.8
10.6
8.7
13.0
24.2
11.0
11.5
19.8
Balance Sheet Approach
• There is no common matrix by which all
social impact issues can be measured!
– History of ignoring issues that could not be
quantified numerically or monetarised
– Cost/Benefit Analysis will not work
List all benefits/gains v. all costs/losses
– Consider distributional effects, equality and
social justice
– Weighting of measures
Indicators e.g. Andrea Colantonio (2007)
Social
1. Access to resources
2. Community needs ( e.g. are communities able to articulate their
needs?)
3. Conflicts mitigation
4. Cultural promotion
5. Education
6. Elderly and aging
7. Enabling knowledge management (including access to E-knowledge)
8. Freedom
9. Gender equity
10. Happiness
11. Health
12. Identity of the community/civic pride
13. Image transformation and neighbourhood perceptions
Indicators
Social cont.
14. Integration of newcomers (especially foreign in-migrants) and
residents
15. Leadership
16. Justice and equality
17. Leisure and sport facilities
18. Less able people
19. Population change
20. Poverty eradication
21. Quality of Life
22. Security and Crime
23. Skills development
24. Social diversity and multiculturalism
25. Well being
Indicators
Socio-Institutional
26. Capacity Building
27. Participation and empowerment
28. Trust, voluntary organisations and local networks (also know as Social
Capital)
Socio-economic
29. Economic security
30. Employment
31. Informal activities/economy
32. Partnership and collaboration
Socio-environmental
33. Inclusive design
34. Infrastructures
35. Environmental Health
36. Housing (quality and tenure mix)
37. Transport
38. Spatial/environmental inequalities
Indicators - criticisms
For example:
Difficult to measure indicators
Time horizon
Counterfactual – did it make a difference?
Combined effects of lots of indicators Σ>parts
Context is important - different cultural
interpretations of social and different
contexts
- But it is easy to criticise and hard to
present something better!
How to Structure Chapters?
Social Well-Being, Cohesion and
Human Health
2 proposed methods of presenting material
1) 5 chapters
2) 1 chapter with subsections
Method 1
(5 chapters)
Chapter 11. Social well-being, cohesion and
human health impacts
- background and policy context for the social pillar
- assessment tools
- modelling social impacts
Chapter 12.
Chapter 13.
Chapter 14.
Chapter 15.
Chapter ?
Governance
Employment and social inclusion
Equality and basic rights
Health impact
EU Policy
Method 2
(1 chapter with subsections)
Chapter 11.
Social well-being, cohesion and human
health impacts
§ 11.1
§ 11.2
§ 11.3
§ 11.4
§ 11.5
§ 11.6
§ 11.7
§ 11.8
Introduction and policy
background
Governance
Employment
Community Development
Health and Well-being
Culture and heritage
Assessment tools
Modelling social impacts
A Final Comment
The Economics Pillar is still developing as
the principle of sustainable development is
difficult to analyse as it is contrary to
certain key assumptions/goals of
traditional economics
- weak substitutability
- discount rates
- economic agents
- (sustainable) growth as the main objective
A Final Comment cont.
The Social Pillar is the least developed area
of impact assessment
- newest (<10-20 years) No systematic model
- least developed theoretically due to difficulty in
comparing quality issues/impacts with other
quality issues & with quantifiable issues/impacts;
holistic v reductionalist views etc.
- scale of community being analysed
dramatically changes the possible matrices and
impact issues
Is sustainability the core or is social an ‘add on’ to
environment and economic?
Thank you
Employment Research Institute
Napier University, Edinburgh
Institute website: http://www2.napier.ac.uk/depts/eri/home.htm
Diagram: Causal model of impacts – increased
timber harvesting
Employment
Increase
Policy:
increase
timber
harvest
Increase in Population
Wages Increase
Rents Increase
Low Income
Workers Displaced
from Housing
Chart
Policy/Project
Combined Qualitative Assessment and Impact Matrix Analysis
Employment/Wages
Employment increases (large)
* Local population employed - 50 jobs
*Non-local population employed - 15 jobs
(skilled or experienced to manage
expansion)
Likelihood - 60%
All unemployed workers with appropriate
skills set are likely to gain full time
employment
Employment increases (small)
* Local population employed - 25 jobs
*Non-local population employed - 5 jobs
(skilled or experienced to manage
expansion)
Likelihood - 40%
Some unemployed workers with
appropriate skills set are likely to gain full
time employment
Wages increase (large)
*15% average wage increase
Likelihood - 50%
*Upward wage pressure through out
timber sector
*Substantial improvement for
unemployed as wages are greater than
minimum level
Wages increase (small)
*15% average wage increase
Likelihood - 50%
*Upward wage pressure through out
timber sector
*Substantial improvement for
unemployed as wages are greater than
minimum level
Population
Population increase
(large)
Likelihood - 50%
Population increase
(small)
Likelihood - 40%
Rent
Rent increase
(large)
Likelihood - 60%
Rent increase
(small)
Likelihood - 30%
Rent stable -no
change
Likelihood - 10%
Population decrease
(small)
Likelihood - 10%
Definition of Rural Regions and
Typology
• Assessing the pertinence of the OECD classification:
– Simple, transparent, takes account of internal patterns within
regions, widely recognised
– But major weaknesses include heterogeneity of NUTS 3
regions, ignores differences in “economic potential” of
regions, density thresholds are arbitrary
• 3 alternative options (all incorporating a peripherality
index) are presented and assessed, two of these give
better discrimination between different types of rural
Typology
according by
to labour
region (assessed
anova market
test) performance:
– Simple transparent disaggregative approach
– Separate demography and economic activity/unemployment
typologies
– Combined typology – reveals relatively favourable labour
market situation in PU regions, SR and PR more mixed:
fewer strong performance regions, more moderately
performing regions, and roughly the same proportion of
Bottom-line Objective
• Identify the impacts of a potential policy or
proposed project
To answer the question:
What can be done to maximise and
distribute the social benefits while
mitigating the negative impacts/costs
to individuals or groups within
society?